If it was Lionel
Tertis (1876-1975) who put the viola on the map as a solo instrument,
it was the Scotsman William Primrose (1904-1982) who established
a more modern, brilliant style, gradually taking his distance
from Tertis’s deeper tones. Modern listeners might have to “adjust”
to Tertis, as they do to Kreisler or Szigeti, in order to appreciate
them, but should have no such problems with Primrose, at least
in Berlioz and Walton.

The Casadesus was
actually believed to be real Handel when this recording was
made, though with its delicate wind band in place of a continuo
surely they must, even then, have realized that it had been,
at the very least, thoroughly “doctored”? Under the circumstances
one can hardly complain about an unauthentic approach – indeed,
given its spurious romantic origin I suppose this is the
authentic approach, though it might be amusing, one April Fool’s
Day, to try it out with a dedicated original instruments band.

Tully Potter tells
us in his notes that the conductor Frieder Weissmann is best
remembered for marrying the soprano Meta Seinemeyer on her deathbed.
On a slightly less “Trivial Pursuits” level, he was nearly
the first conductor to record all the Beethoven Symphonies,
but became, instead, the first of several – another was Joseph
Keilberth – who recorded a “headless monster”: the first eight
symphonies only. An immensely active recording artist before
the war, he sank from view after it though his career lasted
until at least 1960. Justly or not, he is now remembered only
in relation to the famous artists he accompanied on disc.

The 1946 Walton
recording was already the composer’s second, the first having
been made with Frederick Riddle eight years earlier. Modern
listeners, accustomed to hearing this concerto played rather
more lushly and romantically, might find the present version
a bit relentlessly brilliant. Walton himself tended to be suspicious
of his own more romantic side and appears to be encouraging
this approach, no doubt hoping to disguise the fact that even
in this fairly early work the enfant terrible of Façade
was acquiring middle-aged spread. Later, in well-upholstered
old age, he took to conducting the piece rather more slowly.
He had in any case, in 1961, considerably expanded the orchestration,
so your best chance to hear the original leaner conception is
the present recording, dated but reasonably clear. A further
recording by Primrose, with the RPO under Sargent and coupled
with Hindemith’s Die Schwanendreher under Pritchard,
was issued in America by Columbia Odyssey and in Europe by Philips.
It has been unavailable for at least two generations.

Primrose made three
commercial recordings of Harold in Italy; the present
version was followed by those under Beecham and Munch. To these
must be added two live recordings under Toscanini. Conventional
wisdom has it that the performance under Koussevitzky was the
finest of the three “official” ones. I haven’t the Beecham to
hand but quite frankly the differences with the Munch are so
great as to render quite meaningless the concept of a “best”
version. Munch’s Harold is bathed in the sort of softly
glowing lights Berlioz’s countryman and near-contemporary Corot
found in Italy; furthermore Munch’s climaxes have a euphoric
blaze, a hedonistic splendour, which suggest a kinship between
his own temperament and that of the composer. Koussevitzky’s
tighter control but slower tempi mean that Harold is
surrounded by louring mountains and threatening skies. The most
notable difference is in the second movement (Koussevitzky:
08:49, Munch: 06:40). Koussevitzky’s pilgrims are a footsore
if prayerful lot; Munch’s sound weary but at the same time joyful,
movingly aware that their goal is at last in sight. In view
of this, and some fidgety tempo changes in the first movement
from Koussevitzky, I must say my own preference would be for
Munch, which obviously benefits from 1958 stereo, though if
it’s DDD sound you’re after you will obviously want something
much more recent still (the latest version under Sir Colin Davis,
for example). That said, the Koussevitzky sounds remarkably
good for its age and of course his alternative view is worth
having.

Reviews
from previous monthsJoin the mailing list and receive a hyperlinked weekly update on the
discs reviewed. detailsWe welcome feedback on our reviews. Please use the Bulletin
Board
Please paste in the first line of your comments the URL of the review to
which you refer.